When thousands of people donate no more than $100 per person per election, we can build a campaign without money from special interests. _______________________ But it's about more than money. We need your energy and your enthusiasm, too. Sign up to volunteer on Jim Hansen's campaign for Congress.
 _______________________ 
|
|
You must Register and Login before you can correspond with this community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
These community forums are intended solely as a tool for people to express their views. As long as everyone in the forums acts in a respectful manner, the discussions will remain unmoderated by campaign staff.
The campaign is not responsible for forum content. Views expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect Jim Hansen's views, nor the views of his campaign.
Take them for what they are, an informal conversation about issues that matter to all Idahoans. And by all means, participate!
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply.
|
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
Peter Rickards
Posts:13
 |
| 18 Feb 2006 19:24 |
 Alert
|
Hi Jim and everyone,
John Kerry had a hard time convincing America he had a plan for Iraq and terrorism, that was any different or better than Bush's plan, despite Kerry's military service. What is your plan Jim?
Please don't say we need the world to help us. We asked, and they refused. No country wants to join us now as sitting duck targets on the Iraq street corners.
Craig Cooper, the other Dem candidate, says we should bring the troops home. However, with his caveats of "letting the military, not politicians, decide when Iraq is secure enough to bring the troops home," that unfortunately is the exact rhetoric Cheney uses. Same plan, same words. But many Idahoans support Bush too.
The soldiers who are maimed and killed daily, deserve specifics on any candidate's Iraq position, so what are Jim's plans?
1) Do we bring the troops home now, or with a time table that tells the terrorists they have won?
2) Do the troops stay until Iraq is peaceful, or until "Iraq" can defend
itself, or when it is a democracy? (That could be decades or maybe not that
long, or maybe never...)
3) Do we leave Afghanistan? Should we go after Bin Laden?
4) Please don't misunderstand this question. I love Jewish people, but do we continue to give $3 Billion per year to support Israel's military, and get blamed for every Arab they kill in retaliation?
This policy dates to 1948. We basically got involved in a religious war, thousands of years old, and have militarily back one side of the religious war. Is that appropriate?
Combined with our CIA backing of the Shah of Iran, and his seven palaces, etc, is this not why Arab people tend to hate America? Have we not been at war with Arabs for decades, exclusively on their land, until Sep 11th?
Please don't think I am condoning terrorism, but we have blood on our hands that we have never admitted. Most Americans never think about it. Most Arabs do...
Sincerely...Peter in Twin Falls |
|
|
|
|
Jessica Cavalieri
Posts:5
|
| 18 Feb 2006 22:22 |
Alert
|
The problem is that while Dick Cheney says that, he doesn't mean it. Obviously the PNAC gang would like to maintain a permanent presence in Iraq.
Personally, I like Richard Clarke's plan: http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+A+way+out+of+Iraq&expire=&urlID=16402686&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fopinion%2Feditorials%2F2005-11-28-richard-clarke-edit_x.htm&partnerID=1660
Of course, a true plan would be many pages long and encompass much more than a few steps. However, Clarke's plan is a good start and something to consider.
Here is a wide range of exit plans: http://www.comw.org/pda/0512exitplans.html
|
|
"Give me the money that has been spent in war and I will clothe every man, woman, and child in an attire of which kings and queens will be proud. I will build a schoolhouse in every valley over the whole earth. I will crown every hillside with a place of worship consecrated to peace." ~Charles Sumner
|
|
|
Peter Rickards
Posts:13
|
| 19 Feb 2006 22:41 |
Alert
|
Hi Jessica,
You are dead right on the PNAC plan. I have to agree that Richard Clark has a reasonable plan, and addresses the negatives well. He still ends up harboring our troops in Kuwait though. I think the jihadists may well then target Kuwait, and that leaves our soldiers defending the palaces of the Kuwait equivalent of the Beverly Hillbillies. I loved Jed Clampett, but don't care much for the priveledged palace people.
I find it interesting that Jim is running for Congress and won't share his plan for Iraq. I paste below what you find on Jim's "issues" icon under Iraq. I am so tired of say nothing sweet talking politicians. Cooper uses catch phrases on Iraq that sound good, but duplicate Cheney, and will prolong the war. I hope Jim will articulate his plan. Not only do our soldiers deserve it, but I don't think you can beat Simpson by never saying if you support the Bush plan on Iraq, and simply asking voters how they feel...Peter
| Author: |
Jim Hansen |
|
|
 |
| People across the globe are connecting with each other directly and becoming less and learning more about what we share and what we fear. Share your thoughts and experiences about America's role in the world. In particular, what are your impressions of when and how to use military force in places like Iraq and Iran. | |
|
|
|
|
Ted Vanegas
Posts:15
|
| 20 Feb 2006 4:51 |
Alert
|
I wonder, is there a right answer to this question? It seems that no matter what anyone says we should be doing with the Iraq situation there still remains major problems. The politically correct answer is that we have, for better or worse, committed ourselves, and until a stable government, whatever that means, can be established and stabilized in the country we are obligated to stay. It is a very complicated matter and one that isn't going to have a straight forward answer, or one that is going to please all sides.
For me, the core issue is why hasn't our government investigated the suspicious reasons that we went into Iraq in the first place? Why does the administration seem to be getting a pass on this? We are spending billions of dollars every month, lives are being lost and our domestic social programs are being cut to pay for it. Again, this goes back to the point that Jim has already alluded to, that our system of checks and balances seems to be failing right now. I see no accountability in our government at this time. |
|
|
|
|
Peter Rickards
Posts:13
|
| 20 Feb 2006 5:59 |
Alert
|
Howdy Ted,
I agree that accountability is lacking. Checks and balances are needed. But is Jim going to check, or balance Bush's Iraq strategy? You appear to endorse staying until a stable government can be established. You agree stability is slightly undefinable.
But we have started a civil war, and precipitated a foreign jihadist recruiting symbol, so how many more Americans gets maimed and murdered before we declare "victory" and leave?
The Richard Clarke plan, mentioned by Jessica above, acknowledges our remaining there inflames the situation, and picks an election date to begin withdrawl, apparently regardless of any peace, stability, or cessation of roadside bombs.
But on accountability, I hate to be a bother, but is it not appropriate for Jim to say which or what plan he will follow? I appreciate you and Jessica having different plans, but how accountable is it for a guy running for Congress to have no plan? |
|
|
|
|
Ted Vanegas
Posts:15
|
| 20 Feb 2006 15:31 |
Alert
|
Hi Peter,
No I'm not necessarily saying that we should stay until a stable government is established, I'm saying that is the politically correct answer being used mostly by the administration.
In my opinion, I'm not sure that Jim needs a concrete plan for Iraq, after all he's not running for president. There are too many differing viewpoints in congress, and each member likely has his/her own idea of what should happen. I think it is the job of the administration to have a concrete plan and its the job of congress to quesion that plan and decide its viability. Really, the Republicans aren't even unified on what should be done in Iraq, and the Democrats certainly aren't either. But you are correct when you say that he should have an idea of what direction he wants to go, and I know that he indeed does because we've discussed the issue many times over coffee.
One thing I like about Jim is that he is a very intelligent and thoughtful man, and he understands historical processes better than anyone I know. You can trust that his plan will be well thought out. |
|
|
|
|
Peter Rickards
Posts:13
|
| 20 Feb 2006 17:39 |
Alert
|
Good Morning Ted,
No doubt you are right, that Jim is a very intelligent and thoughtful man. So WHEN will he share his specific thoughts on Iraq? I have asked him since December, but I have only heard flowery rhetoric in return. Avoiding specifics is the oldest political ploy in the book. Superficial statements is politics as usual, and I had higher hopes for Jim...
The Bush speech writers have already adopted the rhetoric of energy independence to avoid more oil wars. Catch phrases don't cut it with me, but Bush and Cooper are staying the course, while changing the catch phrases.
It is not fair to criticize Bush and have no plan. Will he continue to fund Israeli military actions at $3 billion per year? If voters don't demand details, we are stuck comparing who's family pictures are the cutest, and most likely stuck in a religious war we have no business to be in.
Here is the 60 Minutes website for the news story on the Bush/Christian right's Armegeddon wish, explaining why we support Israel. These numb nuts really think they are doing God's work, and precipitating the second coming of Christ. When Bush tells the terrorists to "Bring it on," these are the words of a man with an Armegeddon wish, and the words of a man who has never been in battle...Peter
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/05/60minutes/main557187.shtml
Falwell Brands Mohammed A 'Terrorist'
Oct. 6, 2002
The Rev. Jerry Falwell (AP)
(CBS) What's the number one item on the agenda of the Christian Right? Abortion? School Prayer? No and No. Believe it or not, what's most important to a lot of conservative Christians is the Jewish State. Israel: Its size, its strength, and its survival. Why?
Bob Simon reports.
There is the alliance between America and Israel in the war on Islamic terror. But it goes deeper. For Christians who interpret the bible in a literal fashion, Israel has a crucial role to play in bringing on the Second Coming of Christ.
|
|
|
|
|
Ted Vanegas
Posts:15
|
| 20 Feb 2006 17:59 |
Alert
|
Hi Peter,
I won't speak for Jim, though like I said, we have discussed this war at length and I completely trust that he has some good ideas and thoughts. But he will have to talk about that when he's ready. We are still early in the campaign.
As for the armegeddon that Falwell and company are waiting for, I've read about some of that myself, also Bill Moyers did a special on it when he was running the PBS program NOW. It is frightening that they have someone in office that is actually listening to them. It is no less dangerous than the Islamic fundamentalism that has instigated the "war on terror", and probably even more so. |
|
|
|
|
Jim Hansen
Posts:21
|
| 20 Feb 2006 20:44 |
Alert
|
I am so glad this discussion is taking place. I'm glad I had a chance to talk with you personally, Peter, on Saturday when I saw you and shared my thoughts. Since starting this campaign a couple weeks ago, people have spoken to me about so many issues they care deeply about (gas prices, loss of health insurance, poor wages and lost jobs, family dislocation...to name just a few) The more we talk about what it will take to make our community better, the more ideas come out on what role our government should or should not play. As I told you on Saturday, Peter, I am drafting something in my own words about how Congress should be involved in international policy and, in particular, the war in Iraq. It is based on my faith and my values so its important to be clear what those values are.
As I mentioned to you, I will post it on the issues page soon. I am concerned that once I say something the discussion will stop. So, promise me that you and everyone else will keep talking about this and other issues you care about. They will prompt others to join in the conversation. I have already learned from you and Jessica and Ted in this forum and want to keep learning what it really means to "represent" you and everyone else AND to live up to my own faith the princples by which I live. I hope when you go to all the places you go in your community (your church, your work, your social circles) you will encourage your friends and neighbors to enter into a discussion like yours on this site. Thanks, I'll keep reading what you all are saying. - Jim
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Rickards
Posts:13
|
| 20 Feb 2006 21:48 |
Alert
|
Howdy Jim,
Thanks for the reply. It was nice to meet you, too, at the Frank Church Banquet. Although our discussion was very brief, I was delighted to hear you are not a pacifist! Your speech on money interests in politics was very good as well.
For the record, for folks reading this thread, I started the post before Jim and I talked, out of frustration of waiting for details. Jim encouraged me to keep posting my thoughts, as he just did above, so I have...
Jim, I hope your position, when you post it, addresses Israel. I know lots of folks have lots of issues, but I am also awaiting your specifics on the nuclear power and plutonium-238 production cluster Simpson has volunteered Idaho for. Cooper endorses all nuclear projects. These projects are already funded, and we need to stop it now or forever seal Idaho's fate.
I should share with folks what I told Jim. I need to know specifics soon, because I am either going to run for Congress in the Democrat primary, or as an Independent on the November ballot, or support a great candidate, like Jim may already be. Without details, as Sting sang, "They all look like Game Show hosts to me..." :-)
Jim, I have high hopes for you. But when you say, "I am concerned that once I say something the discussion will stop," , well, realistically once you take a stand, that is when the discussion truly begins. You will get heat and criticism, but it is the only way I see to hopefully reverse the dead end road we are on, asleep at the wheel.
Thanks again for joining the discussion, and I eagerly await for more...Peter |
|
|
|
|
Jessica Cavalieri
Posts:5
|
| 21 Feb 2006 1:09 |
Alert
|
| I should also say that while I like Richard Clarke's plan, I am not educated enough in this area to say whether or not it is viable, or whether any other plan is viable. I do know enough to say that having no exit plan is a BAD idea. Certainly the Bush cabal of corporate criminals should be looking at all plans/ideas and seeking the expertise of a wide range of experts. |
|
"Give me the money that has been spent in war and I will clothe every man, woman, and child in an attire of which kings and queens will be proud. I will build a schoolhouse in every valley over the whole earth. I will crown every hillside with a place of worship consecrated to peace." ~Charles Sumner
|
|
|
Diana Pauls
Posts:7
|
| 23 Feb 2006 5:32 |
Alert
|
I also will not pretend to have military experience or stragical knowledge, so I really don't know we should do either about Iraq. And as others have said, I don't necessarily believe that "pulling out now" is the correct answer either (even thought that IS my first choice).
My main concern is that it seems as if the administration seems to have eliminated any of the military experts who express opinions which are not in line with the opinions of the executive branch. That frightens me horribly. It's bad enough that we are in Iraq (I think it would be difficult for anybody to convince me that we should have invaded to begin with), but to continue to blunder around and waste lives based on distorted explanations is criminal. If we are going to do it, then please, dear God, let's do it right.
I truly need my government to help me understand why my brother was killed in Iraq. I want to vomit when I'm told that he died for our freedom, to protect us from terrorists, to help Iraq become a democracy or to save Iraqi people from a dictator, etc. Those excuses just don't ring true for me. As far as I can tell, he died so certain politicians could achieve goals based upon their egos or their finances.
Mr. Hansen, all I ask is that you remember men and women like my brother if you are ever called upon to vote on issues related to war. Remember my mother and her blood-curdling screams when the Marines and the Chaplain showed up at her door. I was there and those screams will never be forgotten. Our politicians owe my mother and my niece and nephew more than a photo op and platitudes. They owe us the truth and accountability. And if they made a mistake by invading Iraq, then they need to make it a #1 priority to resolve the issue ASAP. Do not allow more men and women to die "in honor of those who have fallen before them." It does NOT honor my brother to have MORE of his men die for a mistake.
|
|
"You can't leave footprints in the sands of time if you are sitting on your butt... and who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?"
|
|
|
Peter Rickards
Posts:13
|
| 23 Feb 2006 6:23 |
Alert
|
Diana,
Well said and Amen... |
|
|
|
|
Jim Hansen
Posts:21
|
| 23 Feb 2006 16:02 |
Alert
|
Diana: You speak with so much crediblity on this issue because of your family's sacrafice. Thank you. I am preparing a statement and will post it this weekend. I realize that as soon as I do I'll probably have my phone tapped and who knows what else since, as you say, the DC insiders are so intolerant of criticism. Our government leaders ought to show the world what democracy looks like by the way we treat each other in debating important issues. Thank you. I can't wait to meet you. - Jim
|
|
|
|
|
Diana Pauls
Posts:7
|
| 23 Feb 2006 17:50 |
Alert
|
I had truly hoped to meet many of you this last weekend at the trainings and the banquet... I was going to go with Donna Pence. Unfortunately, I came down with a virus early that week and just couldn't make it. I was really disappointed because I really NEED some face to face, warm body contact with people who "see the light". (It was additionally frustrating that I am in a position that I have to wait out any illnesses because we cannot afford the doctor bill or the Rx... but that is another forum!!)
Regarding the phone tap comment... is it just me or does anybody else feel that this "Bush needs to have access to at-will wiretapping without following legal process in order to keep America safe" just a cover to allow him to spy on anybody he wants for whatever reason he wants? ("He" refering to his band of theives... I don't think Bush himself is capable of processing anything more in-depth than "See Jane Run" or "My Pet Goat" etc.)
Back to the topic...
Last fall I coordinated a Candlelight Vigil here in Gooding which created a major disturbance among my family and some of my church members. In order to process in a more private manner (except for Bush et al, of course), I started a blog so I could vent and explore and share my thoughts and findings if anybody cared to look at them. I've since evolved into including more local issues as well, but it started out as my opinions of Bush and the administration and the war. If anybody wants to check it out, go to http://wehavefailed.blogspot.com/ . My favorite links that reflect most of my opinions are The Reading List (http://wehavefailed.blogspot.com/2005/08/reading-list.html) and The Guide To Christian Principles During An Election Year (http://www.ncccusa.org/electionyearprinciplesguide.pdf)
Oh, and I've now added this website as well! |
|
"You can't leave footprints in the sands of time if you are sitting on your butt... and who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?"
|
|
|
Bruce Hansen
Posts:5
|
| 10 Mar 2006 17:01 |
Alert
|
It is easy to say now that you are opposed to the war with Iraq, it was hard to say that in the beginning. Initially I was opposed to it, but I supported it for the sole reason that I figured: I am not privy to the CIA briefings, (they must know something that I don't know). Now I see they didn't know anything more than we knew. I feel betrayed! There were no weapons of mass destruction so why did we go? It can't be to fight terrorism becouse Iraq was not a terrorist state. Ironically the opposite is true; Iraq is now becomming a terrorist state! Iraq had a brutal tyrant in control, that is terrible but getting him out doesen't prevent a new one from gaining control. After all, that is what just happened. The U.S. set up a leadership, a few years down the road it failed, not long after that we got Sadam Hussain. Thousands have lost their lives, many more maimed, billions and billions added to our national debt, and what has been accomplished?
Now we have a real mess to deal with. We can't leave now or Iraq will fall into complete anarchy. As soon as stability to some degree is achieved we should carefully pull out, especially if it is what the new Iraqi government wants. Who knows then how long stability and democracy will last, but we can't stay forever. |
|
|
|
|
Peter Rickards
Posts:13
|
| 10 Mar 2006 19:58 |
Alert
|
Hi everyone,
I had meant to post a thanks to Jim on his follow through. I enjoyed reading your Iraq position on the issues page. Although we will disagree on many things, you are by far the best candidate running for Congress. and you will have my vote...Peter |
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|